Daily Moral Libertarian: Why I Can’t Support Ayanna Pressley, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, DSA and their Socialism

TaraElla
TaraElla
Sep 6, 2018 · 5 min read

The Moral Libertarian Ideal: Equal Moral Agency for Every Individual.

The Moral Libertarian Ideal is that there should be Equal Moral Agency for every individual. Every individual should be able to live out their sincerely held moral views, on an equal basis with every other individual. There is also no exception for governments and elites, so there is no excuse for top-down social engineering.

Now, let’s look at the kind of socialism that is being promoted in the West right now, and its problems, from this perspective. In recent days, I have been telling my friends, viewers and readers alike that I am becoming concerned about the rise of socialism in the West, especially with the rise of political celebrities like Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez. I have been encouraging people to keep the pressure up, so that Alexandria will accept that debate with Ben Shapiro, so we can at least learn more about her socialism. For those of you who have been living under a rock, Alexandria is a young socialist who has become a political celebrity since she won a democratic primary against a well-established centrist incumbent in New York. Now, the reasons why some people supported her could have been diverse, including a real belief in socialism, a wish for generation change, support for specific policies like Medicare for All, and unfortunately in some cases, identity politics considerations. Viewers of this show would know the kind of disdain I have for identity politics. But let’s leave that for another time.

Today, I want to focus on the kind of socialism that has been associated with Alexandria and other similar political celebrities. Policy-wise, they like to talk about things like Medicare for All, free college, and a jobs guarantee. And I don’t have too much of a problem with these ideas: I support some form of universal health care provision, even though single-payer is not my first choice. I don’t support free college, but I believe the Australian or British system is worth looking at for America. Finally, my anti-automation stance would mean a virtual jobs guarantee. You know, if we had a policy against using automation in federal, state and local governments alike, we could employ many more people. Just imagine the extra number of operators they will need, and the much improved customer service we will get from our governments. This will cause an increase in expectation of good service across the board, which will also put pressure on the private sector to likewise cut out automation, and employ more people instead. Imagine the number of jobs that can be generated, and how much better customer service will be.

Fully Automated Space Communism? No Thanks, We Want Our Freedom.

But I don’t hear socialists complaining about automation. Why? It’s in their DNA to embrace automation. In fact, many look forward to the day that automation makes most jobs obsolette, so that most people will have no choice but to embrace socialism. There are also ideological reasons, as seen in the increasing use of the slogan Fully Automated Space Communism. As you see, the socialism currently being pushed in America and similar countries is not just Swedish-style social democracy, but a grand scheme to remake society, with roots in 19th-century European radical socialism. For 19th century socialist thinkers, automation and collectivization leads to a grand future, and to get there individual sacrifices must be accepted for now, if need be. I know that not all modern day socialists think like this, but the roots of their movement come from that position. And it is a position that is incompatible with individual liberty.

As a moral libertarian, I believe that it is a moral imperative for every individual to have equal moral agency. Now, when the means of production is collectivized and managed by a central state or committee, when people don’t get to work and earn their own money but must rely on provisions from the collective, I don’t see how there can be equal moral agency at the individual level. Either the majority will decide for everyone, or, in less democratic circumstances, the leaders will decide for everyone. As Orwell said in Animal Farm, ‘some are more equal than the others’. In fact, I believe that so-called democratic socialism actually has a high risk of degenerating into less democratic forms. It’s actually kind of happening already. Recently, British Labour MP Frank Field decided to quit the party that he has been a part of for much of his life, citing intolerance and nastiness from left-wing elements in Corbyn Labour as part of the reason.

Moral Libertarians Demand Equal Moral Agency for Every Individual. Collectivist Societies Simply Can’t Provide That.

Now, you may say Alexandria and similar candidates are not running on platforms of collectivization and planned economies. And that is true. But my concern is that, they are talking the language of a socialism that ultimately leads there. As a recent New York Times article said, today’s socialists are just getting started. They are not going to stop at social democracy. There are already discussions about nationalization of certain industries and establishment of worker’s councils in some circles. And you just have to look to Britain to see how quickly such ideas can spread into the mainstream. I don’t think what Jeremy Corbyn’s supporters are advocating for is just social democracy. They have moved past that into collectivist socialism, and if given the chance, I think socialists in other Western countries would also do likewise. I mean, some left-leaning liberals who really want Medicare for All and free college would inevitably vote for socialist candidates to get these things, but I urge them to take caution about really embracing the socialist agenda. After all, the New Deal liberal and the small government libertarian disagree on how they want to run the government, and both sides have legitimate, individualistic reasons for their views. As a moral libertarian, my tent is big enough to include both of them. Because ultimately, they are both individualists, and they certainly agree on not wanting to turn their country into a collectivist dystopia where everyone must think and work for the collective.

That’s all for today. I’ll be back with more moral libertarian commentary tomorrow. Be sure to subscribe so you don’t miss it.


Originally published at taraellastylia.blogspot.com on September 6, 2018.

TaraElla is a singer-songwriter, independent journalist and author, who is passionate about free speech, liberty and equality. She is the author of the Moral Libertarian Horizon books, which focus on developing a moral case for freedom-based politics in the 21st century.

TaraElla Report: Classical Liberalism and Moral Libertarianism

The modern West was founded on classical liberalism. While we should respect other cultures, here in the West we should be unapologetic in standing for our classical liberal values. We make a case for why these values are still best for the West.

TaraElla

Written by

TaraElla

TaraElla is a singer-songwriter and author, passionate about free speech, liberty and equality. https://www.taraella.com

TaraElla Report: Classical Liberalism and Moral Libertarianism

The modern West was founded on classical liberalism. While we should respect other cultures, here in the West we should be unapologetic in standing for our classical liberal values. We make a case for why these values are still best for the West.

Welcome to a place where words matter. On Medium, smart voices and original ideas take center stage - with no ads in sight. Watch
Follow all the topics you care about, and we’ll deliver the best stories for you to your homepage and inbox. Explore
Get unlimited access to the best stories on Medium — and support writers while you’re at it. Just $5/month. Upgrade